The Hill: dems need 60 votes to NOT extend the Bush tax cuts

[Enrique]

Ok, explain this to me...

The Bush tax cuts barely passed while Bush was president and the GOP controlled both houses.

Now that the democrats control both houses with large majorities, and control the presidency, and now that the deficit is higher and we're in two wars and the Bush tax cuts obviously did not help the economy and Greenspan and Stockman and Voinovich say the Bush tax cuts should end...

Now we need 60 votes to NOT extend them? To NOT extend the temporary tax cuts which were made temporary because even the Bush and the GOP Congress couldn't justify them being permanent due to the deficit?

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/117859-nebraskas-nelson-support-extending-all-tax-cuts

Nebraska’s Sen. Ben Nelson (D) supports paying for and extending all Bush-era tax cuts until the economic recovery has taken root.

"I support extending all of the expiring tax cuts until Nebraska’s and the nation’s economy is in better shape, and perhaps longer, because raising taxes in a weak economy could impair recovery," Nelson said in a statement Thursday.

Senate Democrats will need all 59 Democrats and at least one Republican to pass the Obama administration's plan to extend tax cuts for the middle class while allowing the tax breaks for the highest-income tax brackets to expire. That plan could be a non-starter in the Senate without Nelson's support, since another GOP vote would be needed for passage.

"Continuing all of the tax cuts could provide certainty for families and businesses in Nebraska and nationwide," Nelson said. "Today, many businesses are sitting on cash because of uncertainty, which is holding back economic development across America."

(...)

[WI_DEM]

1. They automatically end at the end of the year from what I understand.

[TheWraith]

34. Right. We can let them completely expire with 0 votes.

But if we want to extend the ones JUST for the bottom 98%, then that requires 60 votes.

So would any plan to extend the entire Bush tax cuts including for the ultra-wealthy, though that would never overcome a presidential veto.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

2. It would be new legislation

[Bryn]

3. Blanche Lincoln wants to extend it, too.

Some of our democrats are rich themselves and are enjoying extra wealth so naturally they don't want tax cuts for the rich to expire. I hope Obama manages to prevent them from extending tax cuts.

[Enrique]

7. Obama could easily prevent it

he could veto it.

[bluestateguy]

16. The scenario I fear is this:

Congress passes an extension of the tax cuts for everybody, "temporarily" (yeah, right) for the rich and permanently for everyone else.

Since the president has to sign or veto the whole package because he does not have the line item veto (funny how the Supreme Court becomes skeptical of presidential powers when the president's name is Bill Clinton), he is faced with either:

1) sign it, and blow up the deficit, and anger the liberal Democrats.

2) veto it, and everybody's taxes will go up on January 1, which would anger just about everybody.

If Reid and Pelosi screw this up, that's what could end up happening.

[ProSense]

4. That is not what that says.

Extending the middle-class tax cuts would require 60 votes, just as extending the tax cuts for the rich requires 60 vote.

The tax cuts expire automatically.

[Bryn]

8. I hope you're right

that the tax cuts expire automatically. But I think they will want to vote on extending it for the rich.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

5. Because they are extending some of them, for lower and middle class Americans.

They'd have to pass that bill, and Republicans could theoretically hold any bill hostage that doesn't extend all of the tax cuts. That would lead to the decision for Democrats to either let them all expire or extend them all, and that's not a fun decision.

[Vincardog]

30. The Democrats can decide to let the GOP kill the extension of middle class tax cuts and let the

voters decide who they blame.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

31. You trust voters way more than I do. (nt)

[Teaser]

6. the text is explicit

the Obama Admin wants to let the tax cuts expire for the wealthiest americans, while preserving those for the middle class.
as of right now, the tax cuts will expire for everyone. new legislation will be necessary to make an exception for the middle class.

[sandnsea]

17. Yep

Scary when the smartest people in the country have such miserable reading comprehension.

[kentuck]

9. I call bullshit...

They don't need any votes. Just let them expire and then pass a stand-alone tax bill if they want to. What the hell is this about??

[Enrique]

11. it's a total scam is what it is

it's a travesty. Everything I'm reading frames it as if letting them all expire is not an option. I'm even reading it at DU.

[FBaggins]

13. That's essentially what they're doing.

The problem is that they don't expire until after the election... And democrats want to pass a middle class tax cut before the election.

[Nancy Waterman]

22. I agree. Let all of the Bush tax cuts expire

Then craft a new and more targeted tax cut bill that specifically helps the economy and DARE Republicans to stop it.

[FBaggins]

24. Again... you can't "let them expire" and then push something through...

...because they don't expire until after the election.

If you want to use tax cuts for the middle class as an election issue, you need to do something before the election.

And if (heaven help us) Republicans regain control of congress... then it's them passing something and daring us to stop it. Would the president veto a bill that ust kept taxes where they are now if the veto meant that working-class families would pay much higher taxes?

[bluestateguy]

10. I thought I remember hearing that George Voinovich was against renewal of the taxcuts

and as he is retiring this year, that might actually be a vote that is in play for us.

[Enrique]

14. that's a great point

I mentioned Voinovich in my OP, but I forgot that he actually has a vote. And there's no excuse for The Hill to neglect that fact.

[valerief]

12. So the rethugs are yapping about extending them for the rich but

they'll block 'em for the not rich. And the rationale they'll use is what? It's all part of the left wing conspiracy to turn America into a socialist Muslim nation? Well, that actually wouldn't surprise me. America is BEYOND IRONY now. Our political system is now officially THEOCORPORABSURDISM.

[sandnsea]

15. So Nebraska doesn't need unemployment benefits

because there's no problem with their economy -- but they do need tax cuts for the rich.

Well alrighty then Bennyboy.

:crazy:

And this says the tax cuts will ALL expire unless there's a cloture vote. Just like when the taxes were passed the first time.

[Bill219]

18. I don't understand this

Weren't the original Bush tax cuts passed through reconciliation or did I read this wrong somewhere?

[democrat_patriot]

19. Reid controls what comes to the floor. Only bring bill with middle

class tax cuts.

Watch the Republicans block that. It will pass with 95 votes.

[Enrique]

20. that's the power of the majority leader

too bad we don't have democrat_patriot for majority leader. We have Harry Reid, and he will not use his power that way. Or if for some reason he does try, then Rahm will call him up at home and tell him to bring up a GOP-friendly bill, and Harry will do it.

[bluestateguy]

21. That's what I hope Reid does

If Reid lets the Enemy Party outsmart him, he will be putting Obama in a very bad situation.

Bring up a stand alone bill to extend the taxcuts for 98% of the people. It will pass, as you said, and Obama will sign it.

I don't even have a problem with Reid bringing up a separate, stand alone bill to extend the tax cuts for the rich, and only for the rich. That forces the Enemy Party and the Scardeycrats to go on record for cutting taxes for the wealthy. But it would have to be ONLY a stand alone bill, otherwise this all gets tied up in knots. Then it would fail, and the Scardeycrats could say they voted to keep the wealthy's tax cuts.

[Cosmocat]

23. No it won't ... Not even close ...

1) The Rs will find SOMETHING completely nonsensical to rally around to defend holding it up
2) The media will carry water on it
3) The 35% lunatics who would follow the republican party over a cliff will go insane about how unamerican it is to increase the taxes of the uber rich
4) The 30% in the middle will sleepwalk through it and go in the direction the media pushes them
5) We will pull our hair out about how insane the Rs are and how pathetically dense the american public is
6) The dems will crape their pants when they see their own shadows, and it will be lucky to pass ...

[BeyondGeography]

25. It's those who would extend the cuts who need 60 votes

and they don't have them.

[TheKentuckian]

27. You can pass them for ten years through reconciliation just like the pukes did.

There is no excuse to maintain those top cuts

[FBaggins]

29. Only if it's part of the budget in advance.

It isn't.

[TheKentuckian]

33. True, they stupidly left no budget instructions. Bunglers!

Oh well fuck it then, taxes going up it is.

[damntexdem]

26. The 60 votes would only be needed to extend the middle-class tax cuts.

The total Dubya tax cuts will automatically end unless some are extended. It would be amusing to see Repukes voting against a simple bill to extend middle-class tax cuts.

[BlueIdaho]

28. No...

We need one President who refuses to sign any bill containing tax cuts for the rich.

[prolesunited]

32. Let them expire

and introduce a new measure that just addresses working and middle class taxpayers

[Mass]

35. They need 60 votes to cut the wealthy's tax cuts without cutting the middle class's.

Without these 60 votes, ALL tax cuts disappear. This is exactly what this says.